The US’s new Africa Command (AFRICOM) has made a promising start: its strategic advice to the Ugandan army for its recent offensive against the Lord’s Resistance Army not only failed to defeat the rebels, but resulted in the deaths of over 900 civilians.
AFRICOM – “the culmination of a ten-year thought process within the Department of Defense” – was set up, according to its website, to “help African nations, the African Union and the regional economic communities succeed.” A laudable goal – no doubt drawing on the US army’s great success in helping communities in Iraq and Afghanistan to thrive. “The designers of U.S. Africa Command,” they say, “clearly understood the relationships between security, development, diplomacy and prosperity in Africa.”
All good stuff. So what does AFRICOM choose as one of its first missions? A military operation against a guerrilla army that has eluded the Ugandan government for decades and has a long history of murdering innocent civilians in reprisal attacks. The US contributed intelligence (yes, really), advice and $1m in fuel.
When the operation failed, of course, and the rebels scattered, they punished local communities. Strangely, despite its claim to understand the links between development and security, and to “incorporate humanitarian organisations” in its activities, AFRICOM didn’t think to advise its Ugandan and Congolese partners, or UN peacekeepers, to protect civilians. Medecins Sans Frontieres says UN peacekeepers in Congo did nothing to protect people, while the UN says it doesn’t have the resources to do so. As Richard noted last week, some communities were able to defend themselves, though without any help from AFRICOM or its partners. But many couldn’t.
A UN official said the operation was as effective as throwing a rock at a hive of bees. Given that civilians’ security is a crucial prerequisite to their development, which in turn is crucial for both stemming the flow of recruits to the LRA and increasing communities’ resilience against it, it would appear AFRICOM’s leaders would benefit from going back to school and having a closer look at those links between development and security, rather than just throwing force at the problem.
